





DOUBT 


OR 


PRACTICAL SUGGESTIONS FOR 
THOSE HAVING INTELLECTUAL 
DIFFICULTIES REGARDING 
THE CHRISTIAN FAITH 


BY 


SHERWOOD EDDY 


Association Press 
New York: 124 East 281TH STREET 
1916 


COPYRIGHT, I916, BY 
THE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF 
Younc MEN’s CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATIONS 


Prices: 10 cents each; 80 cents per dozen; 
$5.00 per hundred, plus carriage. 


DOUBT 


OUBT is a doorway. It is a portal that may lead 
to a larger life. It implies dissatisfaction with the 
cramped quarters of the past and a longing for larger 
liberty. It marks a natural transition from a second- 
hand tradition to a first-hand faith, from a borrowed 
creed to a personal conviction, from the realm of authority 
to the reality of experience. It leads from spiritual 
dependence to independence ; from intellectuai, moral, and 
religious childhood to manhood. But just because it is 
a doorway, it is a state both temporary and crucial. As 
Kant says, “Doubt can never be a permanent resting 
place for the reason; its function is transitional.” It 
may lead either to the outer darkness of settled unbelief 
or to the open sunshine of a larger and surer faith. 
Almost every advance in philosophy, in science, or in 
religion began with a doubt of the old order and a dis- 
satisfaction with things as they were. Modern philosophy 
dates from the doubt of Descartes and others, which 
challenged the arbitrary assumptions of scholastic philos- 
ophy and the artificial system of the time which had been 
reared by tradition. Modern science also was ushered 
in by a period of scepticism which challenged the old 
authority which had so long enthralled the human mind. 
So also in the realm of religion. 
Almost every religious cult or practice was in its 


3 


beginning the best and highest that its worshipers had 
known; but with the dawn of new light, this cult, if still 
blindly and stubbornly held, became a bar to progress. 
It had to be doubted and discarded if the new and higher 
light was to be realized. Doubt is the doorway of escape 
by which the dead past has been left, whether of tradition 
or ecclesiasticism, of superstition or error. 

The modern student cannot accept upon blind authority 
a medieval orthodoxy which, whatever its elements of 
truth or worth for a former generation, has not been 
tested and proved by him. His whole training has taught 
him to prove all things, and to challenge all that would 
claim the allegiance of his faith. He has seen the dis- 
illusionment that followed the outworn creeds of medieval 
science, philosophy, and religion. He has had a glimpse 
at least of the freedom and larger life of modern times. 
Whatever his faith is to be, he feels he cannot take it 
second-hand from his parents but must find a faith of his 
own. At all costs he must begin at the bottom and build 
upon the solid rock of reality. But what is the rock of 
truth, and where is he to find it? He craves the same 
certainty in religion that he finds in the tangible realm of 
nature and of modern science. Naturally then he may 
turn to science for a method which shall guide him in 
his search for truth. 

The brilliant achievements of the nineteenth century 
are due largely to the scientific method of induction, of 
experiment, of appeal to experience. This method does 
not start with a theory or a fine-spun deduction and then 
seek to corroborate it by facts. It starts with an impartial 
facing of the facts one by one, and after patient study 
seeks to discover the general theory or law which is in 


4 


accordance with the facts. If we analyze this inductive 
method, we shall find five elements involved in it. 

First, there must be observation, or an honest facing 
of all the facts. 

Second, the formulation of an hypothesis, or the most 
hopeful working theory to account for the facts. 

Third, an experiment, to test the theory by the facts. 

Fourth, there must be the correction of our theory not 
only by our own successes and failures, but by com- 
parison with the results of others. We must build upon 
the past; we must accept the tested and approved results 
of other scientists and correct our own theories by the 
findings of other workers in the laboratory. 

Fifth, the inductive method is completed by verification. 
We take that to be true which is capable of repeated 
verification; which not only satisfies us, but is also veri- 
fied by all those who are competent and honest investi- 
gators. We appeal, however, only to competent judges. 
The fact that more than half the world does not believe 
that the earth moves around the sun does not disprove 
the fact, for a savage is not competent to judge of such 
matters. As a result of the application of this inductive 
method of science men have come to the great conclusion 
that nature is uniform, that it is reliable, that it responds 
to the honest investigator. And, on the other hand, men 
have found that obedience is the condition of knowledge, 
and only as the conditions are complied with and nature’s 
laws obeyed, do we get the response which we desire. 

Practically all the great achievements of modern science 
have been realized by the application of this inductive 
method of experiment. Columbus, the young student of 
natural science in the University of Pavia, observed cer- 


5 


tain facts which finally led him to the bold hypothesis that 
the earth was round. Twenty years of patient effort 
enabled him at last to make his great experiment. Against 
mutinous sailors and adverse winds and tides he held 
upon his course till at last he sighted a new world. Cor- 
recting his hypothesis by his own voyages and those of 
other explorers, he was finally proved to be correct by 
the circumnavigation of the globe. 

So the great Newton had observed the facts of gravi- 
tation, and formulated his hypothesis of the law of gravity. 
His first experiment failed, but corrected by the findings 
of his friends he was able finally to verify his hypothesis 
and publish it for the benefit of mankind. 

In the same way Darwin observed certain facts of 
variation and natural selection. He formulated his great 
hypothesis of hope. After twenty years of labor, cor- 
recting his earlier theories by the results of others, he 
published his “Origin of Species” in 1859. By the same 
principle the great discoveries of Copernicus, Kepler, and 
Galileo were made and all alike proved that nature is 
reliable and that obedience is the condition of knowledge. 

If we turn to the discoveries of applied science and 
invention, we find that they were made by the application 
of the same method. Watt watched the steam of the tea 
kettle and slowly by patient experiment evolved the steam 
engine. Morse observed the electric spark, studied the 
law of the electric current, and had the faith to believe he 
could make it carry a thought. Men said he was mad, 
but for twelve years he persevered with his experiments 
in the teeth of opposition and in great poverty. Having 
corrected his instrument, he submitted it to be tested by 
others. At last his instrument flashed the message and 

6 


the world has been using it ever since. Bell tested and 
perfected his telephone by the same method. Becquerel 
took his piece of uranium and submitted it to an experi- 
ment, to test his hypothesis, by exposing it to a photo- 
graphic plate. That stone had been waiting to speak and 
tell its secret for ages. Radium was thus discovered and 
has revolutionized modern scientific thought. 

The methods of all these men were the same: obser- 
vation, hypothesis, experiment, correction, verification. 
All alike found that nature is reliable and that obedience 
is the condition of knowledge. 

Let us now apply the scientific method to religion. 
Can educated man have a rational faith, and a vital ex- 
perience in religion today? Let us first ask, however, 
what we mean by faith and religion. Faith is not blind 
credulity or superstition. It may be conceived either as 
unverified conviction or as trust in a person. It is not 
opposed to reason but to sight, and we use it in all the 
relationships of life. Without faith there could be no 
organized commerce or business; there would be financial 
panic instead. Without faith there could be no science, 
if we did not believe in the reliability of nature and its 
laws. Every hypothesis and every scientific discovery is 
a step in faith, a venture into the unknown. For faith, 
whether in science or religion, means the same thing. 
“Faith is the scientific venture in action by which a man 
seeks to transform a reasonable probability, or something 
reported as fact by another person, into a practical cer- 
tainty of his own personal experience.” Faith, then, is 
a venture in action—an experiment. 

In personal relationships, whether human or super- 
human, faith is trust in a person, based on knowledge 


7 


of character. Like friendship, it is a normal growth, 
natural and rational. Both Goethe and Carlyle hold that 
doubt of any kind can be removed only by action. Life 
reacts upon faith. Our faith is the product of our whole 
past life. It expresses the very essence of what we are. 
It is not some arbitrary thing, nor a mere casual opinion. 
“The pure in heart see God,” not as an arbitrary reward, 
but in consequence of a spiritual law. Purity sees, trusts, 
knows by experience. Faith is the assent of the whole 
man—mind, heart and will—to God. It is, according to 
the writer of Hebrews, “the proving of facts not seen” 
(Heb. xi:1, Gr.). It is not credulity regarding subjective 
fancies, but the testing in experience of objective facts, 
and of unseen realities. 

Doubt may be simply ignorance of God. We do not 
trust Him because we do not know Him. As in human 
friendship we trust a friend as we come to know him, so 
in the divine relationship we trust God as we come to 
know Him and fulfil the conditions of His friendship. 
The antidote for doubt is experience. And we live daily 
within reach of testing God and dispelling doubt. 

And what do we mean by religion? Seneca’s ancient 
definition of religion was “to know God and imitate Him.” 
We would not be satisfied entirely with Kant’s definition 
that it is “the recognition of all duties as divine com- 
mands.” Rather, it is the whole life of man in his relations 
with the spiritual world. In its essence it is a relation- 
ship, a vital relationship. It is such a relation to the 
source and ground of existence as shall enable me to 
become all I am capable of becoming. If it is true, it 
should fully develop and then fully satisfy my highest 
nature. 

8 


Now, if there is a ground or source of existence, if 
there is a God, we should expect to find Him a reliable 
God, who would respond not only in the field of science 
or natural law, but also in religion. Here, too, we should 
expect to find that obedience is the condition of knowl- 
edge. But can the mind know that there is a God? Can 
the heart know that God is love? Can the will receive 
power to help one when fiercely tempted? Whatever my 
doubt, amidst the wreck of old superstitions; however 
great my scepticism, there are certain things of which I 
may be sure. First, I know that I am. “Cogito, ergo 
sum’—“T think, therefore I am.’’ The mental process 
which attempts to disprove my existence only proves it. 
I may not know what I am, but I know that lam. I may 
not know what electricity is, but I can use it. We have 
knowledge enough for practical reason and for daily 
living. 

And I know a second fact: I know that there is a 
difference between right and wrong. No student is sunk 
so low that he does not know that there is some difference 
between right and wrong. A moral monster no more 
disproves the conscience than an insane man disproves 
the reason. No man could maintain that it is right to 
murder his mother, rob his father, or wreck his own life. 

And I know a third fact: that there are imperative 
reasons for doing the right. All history asserts it. My 
conscience confirms it. My experience has proved it. 
Ethics demands it. Religion assures it. Every man 
morally in earnest will admit that there are imperative 
reasons for doing the right. 

And I know a fourth fact: I know thousands testify 
from personal experience that they have found God by 


9 


doing right. Thousands whose testimony I would accept 
in any court of law or on any other subject, thousands 
of educated men in every land, state that they have found 
God by obeying His laws. 

And I know a fifth fact: I know that I ought to follow 
my highest nature; that I ought to do the right, and to 
test this hypothesis of God which has satisfied thousands 
of educated men. For if there be a God, and I refuse to 
make the experiment, then I am turning my back on 
possible light, on my own highest nature, on the hope 
of humanity, on my Maker and my God. One cannot 
prove with the reason alone that there is a God, but we 
may show that the burden of proof rests upon every man 
to test the hypothesis, to make the experiment, and to 
remember that obedience is the condition of knowledge. 
Faith is but a venture in action, rational and scientific. 
The only contradiction is between an unscientific belief 
and an unbelieving science. Science and religion do 
not contradict each other any more than astronomy and 
botany. The sun does not contradict the flower; they 
were made for each other. The flower turns its face to 
the sun to get its warmth and light. 

Why, then, do I believe in God? I have two grounds 
for that belief: Science and Religion, two parts of one 
arch, two arms of one bridge, to span the gulf between the 
seen and the unseen, between man and God. Science at 
least points towards a first cause. It sees the great sweep 
of law, the onward march of evolution, of progress. It 
sees the signs of a great plan, a great purpose. And 
purpose, as we know it, is always grounded in will. 
Science points towards a cause; religion finds this cause. 
The reason gropes for God; the heart finds Him. What 


10 


science postulates religion proves. It finds it in definite, 
personal experience. As Mr. Balfour says in his “Foun- 
dations of Belief,’ ‘Science does not disprove religion 
but rather gives a new and added argument for religion.” 

Take even the well-known testimony of Darwin. 
Though he earnestly maintains that his findings are not 
“irreligious,” he says of himself :— 


“It may be truly said that I am like a man who has become 
colour-blind. ... Up to the age of thirty poetry was a pleasure, 
also pictures and music. Now Shakespeare nauseates me and I 
have lost all taste for pictures and music. My mind has become 
a machine for grinding laws out of facts. Part of my brain is 
now atrophied. If I had it to do over again, I would read 
poetry, etc., once a week. A loss of these tastes is a loss of 
happiness and is injurious to the intellect and moral character.” 


In other words, he had not made the great experiment in 
religion, and he does not claim he has a right to speak on 
this subject any more than he would have on astronomy 
or any other branch of knowledge he had totally neglected. 
Bacon’s familiar words are still true: “A little natural 
philosophy, and the first entrance into it, doth dispose 
the opinion to atheism, but on the other side, much natural 
philosophy and wading deep into it, will bring about men’s 
minds to religion.” 

Sir Oliver Lodge writes: “The tendency of science, 
whatever it is, is not in an irreligious direction at the 
present time, but the realization of the unity of the cosmic 
scheme tends to faith and not to unbelief or unfaith. We 
are beginning to realize that the whole scheme demands 
real sense, an organizer, a manager, a controller, acces- 
sible to prayer, able and willing to help.” Stating his 
own faith, he says: “I believe in one Infinite and Eternal 

II 


Being, a guiding and loving Father, in whom all things 
consist. I believe that the Divine Nature is specially 
revealed to man through Jesus Christ our Lord, who 
lived, and taught and suffered in Palestine 1900 years 
ago, and has since been worshipped by the Christian 
Church as the immortal Son of God, the Saviour of the 
world.” While the great Newton says: “I seem to be a 
little child picking up the pebbles on the seashore of 
eternity.” No one can deny that multitudes of educated 
men have made the experiment and have found God. 
Why should not you make the venture of faith? Will 
you not make the experiment and see if God will respond? 

Romanes, the scientist, after years of agnosticism 
fought his way back to a rational faith. Writing of his 
new experience in his “Thoughts on Religion,” he says: 
“Try the only experiment available—the experiment of 
faith. Do the doctrine, and if Christianity be true, the 
verification will come, not indeed mediately through 
any course of speculative reason, but immediately by 
spiritual intuition. . . . Such an experimental trial would 
seem to be the rational duty of a pure agnostic.” 

This method of appeal to human experience was the 
method of Christ Himself. It is found in the principle 
that if any man will do he shall know. It was toward 
the close of Jesus’ ministry, as His conflict with the 
Pharisees was approaching its crisis, that He gave them 
this challenge: “If any man willeth to do his will, he 
shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God, or 
whether I speak from myself” (John vii: 17, R. V.). His 
words show at once the cause of unbelief and the con- 
dition of faith. Every word is significant. “If’—His 
promise is conditional. It depends upon the man him- 

I2 


self whether or not he will fulfil the conditions. “If any 
man”—lIt is of universal application. “If any man will- 
eth’ —His ultimate appeal is to the will. “If any man 
willeth to do”—Doing is here made the condition of 
knowing. A right life is the condition of right belief. 

There is then a causal connection between works and 
faith, between life and belief. “If any man willeth to do 
His will’—1. e., God’s will. He takes men where He finds 
them. He judges them according to the light they already 
have. He makes the conditions of further knowledge and 
of belief in Himself to be obedience to the standard of 
truth which they themselves have already admitted and 
professed; for they have believed in God, and admitted 
that His will should be the guiding principle of their 
lives. “If any man willeth to do His will, he shall know 
of the teaching”— 17.e. the truth of the doctrines which 
He taught, and, by implication, of the claims which He 
made—‘“‘whether it be of God,” authentic, authoritative, 
true, divine; or “whether I speak from myself,’ un- 
authorized, independent, mistaken, untrue. In a word, 
He says in substance, that if anyone will try to do what 
he believes to be the right, living up to the light that he 
has, and obeying the truth so far as he sees it, he shall 
come step by step to understand Christ’s teaching, and 
to verify His claims, as to whether they are indeed the 
very truth of God or not. 

Here, then, we have a great underlying principle and 
condition of belief. If any man will do, he shall know. 
Obedience is the condition of knowledge. Moral re- 
sponse is the condition of spiritual vision. And conversely, 
if any man will not do, he shall not know. Disobedience 
to truth is the precursor of doubt and sin, a cause of 


13 


unbelief. Every act of disobedience to truth and light, 
every sin, by however so little, dulls the conscience, 
darkens the mind, deadens the heart, weakens the will, 
affects the character. Professor James says: “When a 
resolve or a fine glow of feeling is allowed to evaporate 
without bearing practical fruit, it is worse than a chance 
lost; it works so as positively to hinder future resolutions 
and emotions from taking the normal path of discharge. 
The drunken Rip Van Winkle excuses himself by saying, 
‘I won’t count this time.’ Well, he may not count it, 
but it is being counted none the less. Nothing we ever 
do is, in strict scientific literalness, wiped out.” By an 
inevitable psychological law the natural effect of sin is 
unbelief. And conversely, every obedience to truth, every 
moral response to duty, quickens the conscience, clears the 
spiritual vision, strengthens the will, places us upon a 
higher vantage ground, and prepares us for the perception 
of fresh truth. 

As we proceed to speak of doubt and of the grounds 
of faith, we do not wish to discourage or discredit that 
earnest spirit of inquiry which seeks to prove all things, 
and hold only that which is true. We are not pleading 
for blind credulity. We have the fullest sympathy for 
honest questioning and fearless research. Descartes 
began by doubting all things, but it was in order to find 
the truth. He did not doubt for the sake of doubting, 
nor to cover up an inconsistent life and a guilty con- 
science. It was a questioning that led to faith founded 
on surer foundations, not a scepticism which led to settled 
unbelief. 

But while we encourage inquiry, let us also recognize 
the limitations of reason. Outside of pure mathematics 


14 


the unaided human reason cannot absolutely prove any- 
thing. Plato, Bacon, and Kant have shown us that the 
reason alone cannot find God. Plato, groping for light, 
speaks of our having to sail the seas of darkness and 
doubt on the raft of our understanding, and adds: “Not 
without risk, as I admit, if a man cannot find some word 
of God which will more surely and safely carry him.” 
Martineau says: “We can no more find God with the 
reason alone than we can find the scent of a rose with 
our fingers. It is not the faculty concerned. Faith is the 
faculty.” And, like any other faculty, it may proceed 
rationally, rest upon evidence, and test the facts of 
experience. 

All will depend upon the attitude which is behind our 
doubt—whether it is one of seeking to find light and to 
follow it, or seeking to prove there is no light because it 
loves the darkness. Doubt looks for light. Unbelief is 
content with darkness. Whether one has intellectual 
difficulties with regard to the Bible as the record of 
God’s revelation to men, or concerning the person or 
work of Jesus Christ, or concerning God Himself in His 
providence and His personal relation to men, Christ’s 
principle may be applied. 


I. Dousts CONCERNING THE BIBLE 


We need, do we not, some corrective of individual 
judgment. The individual reason is limited. Our spirit- 
ual vision and moral perception are clouded and darkened 
by sin. Our reason is not infallible and unchangeable, 
but with our growth in knowledge and moral purity our 
views change, and we must admit that we have made 
mistakes in the past. Again, my reason is at variance 


15 


with that of other men. Men wiser and purer than I 
differ from me. If, then, my own view of truth is not 
infallible, where may I turn for a corrective? Truth is 
often found at the intersection of conscience and tradi- 
tion; at the point where my individual experience coin- 
cides with the collective experience of those who have 
followed the light and found it. 

In the Bible we find the record of God’s dealings with 
men and of men’s search for God and their experience 
when they have found Him. We should therefore recog- 
nize the purpose of this record. It is that other men, by 
complying with the same conditions and obeying the same 
laws, should find the same experience of God. The object 
of the record then is that we may have life and that we 
may have it more abundantly. The Bible was not given 
to teach us history, or geography, or any branch of 
science, but to teach the essential truths of religion and 
morality. It was not intended as a rule of astronomy 
and geology, but of faith and practice. 

Though not for a moment suggesting that revelation is 
a mechanical process like dictation, yet, to illustrate one 
point alone, suppose I dictate a letter to a stenographer. 
My purpose is to communicate a message to my friend. 
When the writer brings me the letter, suppose I find 
certain trifling mistakes in punctuation, spelling, or dic- 
tion. I might destroy the letter, and compel him to write 
another; but even if I did so, he would still be fallible, 
and might make the same or other mistakes. As I look 
over the letter, however, I see that he has caught my 
meaning, and that my friend will get the message I 
intended. Therefore, while I may correct any serious 
mistakes, I sign my name to the letter, thereby endorsing 

16 


not so much the typewriting or punctuation or diction of 
the writer as the message and meaning I intended to 
convey. When my friend receives the letter, if he criti- 
cises the writing or punctuation, and does not see the 
good news or the message of love, he misses the whole 
point; but the fault is his, not mine. 

The above illustration is not intended to suggest a 
mechanical method of inspiration, but only that the reader, 
instead of looking for the human limitations, asks the 
essential question whether the Bible does indeed contain 
the divine message of life for him. The Bible does 
claim to be a record of a revelation from God, and as 
such we may test it. Let us take it up as we would any 
scientific text-book, and study it by the inductive method. 
For illustration, suppose a class is beginning the study of 
chemistry. The text-book is by the greatest authority on 
the subject. The teacher commends the book to the 
students, stating that he has tested every experiment 
himself, and that the preceding classes also have found 
them true. The student should have enough faith in the 
author, the testimony of the teacher, and of those who 
have worked through the book in the laboratory, not to 
blindly assent to the whole but to try the experiments for 
himself one by one. The student finds that the book con- 
tains certain great laws or principles, and various experi- 
ments which illustrate or demonstrate those laws. He 
begins with the first experiment. He adds the acid to the 
alkali, and for himself gets the salt or base. Now one 
thing he knows. Faith has been changed by experiment 
into knowledge. And with increased confidence or faith 
he tries the second experiment. Thus, by experience 
doubt gives way to certainty. 


17 


But suppose a man fails in some experiment. He does 
not find the substance in solution which was supposed 
to be there. The other men in the laboratory found it, 
the teacher assures him it is there, and the text-book 
states it will be found if certain conditions are fulfilled. 
The student does not rashly conclude that the book is 
false, the teacher deluded, the other men all in error, or 
that the laws of nature have failed. He naturally con- 
cludes that he failed to fulfil some condition, and that the 
mistake was probably his own. He tries again, carefully 
fulfilling every condition, and now it works! 

Now, let us take the Bible as a text-book, full of prin- 
ciples and experiments, of moral precepts and a promised 
experience, which will result upon the fulfilment of cer- 
tain conditions. Every promise is an invitation to try an 
experiment with God. The author claims to speak with 
authority upon morality and religion, upon matters of the 
soul and of God. Nineteen centuries of successive classes 
of men have been testing its truth. In every age multi- 
tudes have been transformed by it, and have testified 
that through its truth they have found peace, have had 
power over sin, hope for the future, and that through it 
they have come to know God. It is the Word of God, 
because it meets the need of the human heart, and 
through it thousands have entered into vital relationship 
with the living God. 

And it is the word of man, for it was lived before it 
was written. Its truth has been tested. It has filtered 
through the world’s best life for more than twenty cen- 
turies. And its words will prove spirit and life to you, 
as to others, if it is tested, experienced, and reincarnated 
in your life. As the German poet, Heine, wrote, “I 

18 


attribute my enlightenment entirely and simply to the 
reading of a book... an old, honest book... the 
Bible. . . . He who has lost his God can find Him again 
in this book; and he who has never known Him is here 
struck by the breadth of the Divine Word.” While John 
Locke wrote, “Study the Holy Scriptures, especially the 
New Testament. Therein are contained the words of 
eternal life. It has God for its author, salvation for its 
end, and truth for its matter.” The poet, Coleridge, says, 
“For more than a thousand years the Bible has gone hand 
in hand with civilisation, science, law, in short with moral 
and intellectual cultivation. I know the Bible is inspired, 
because it finds me at greater depths of my being than 
any other book.” 

As the Psalmist says, “Thy word is a lamp unto my 
feet, and a light unto my path.” In parts of the Orient 
in the old days they used to wear a small lamp on the 
toe of the sandal. It threw light at least one step ahead. 
If a man stood still he might complain that the way 
was dark, and refuse to move. But if he took one step in 
the light, there was always light enough to take yet 
another, and the light advanced in proportion as he walked 
in what he already had. So is it with the divine light 
of truth, We know by doing, we learn by obeying. 

Begin with the first promise in the Sermon on the 
Mount, as did a well-known Brahman convert in India. 
He had made a comparative study of the other leading 
religions except Christianity, and was an authority on the 
Sanskrit writings of his own people. One day he was 
given a New Testament in a railway carriage. He read 
it out of curiosity. He was struck by the high moral 
teaching of the Sermon on the Mount. He said that as he 


iQ 


read on he was filled with admiration for the character of 
the man Jesus, and devoured the entire book to learn all 
he could of Him. At length he began to doubt His mere 
humanity. He longed to know if these claims of His 
were false or true. Was He indeed the Son of God and 
the Saviour of the world? 

He turned back again to the beginning, wondering how 
he could put these claims to the test, and his eye fell 
upon the first promise, “Ask, and it shall be given unto 
you.” Here was a chance to try an-experiment, and put 
Christ’s claims to the test. He said that he prayed some- 
what in this manner: “O God, I believe in Thee, but I 
do not know if the claims of Jesus are true. Is He 
indeed Thy Son and man’s Saviour? I do not understand 
this book, nor its historic allusions. Jesus claims that He 
will answer true prayer offered in His name. If He is 
indeed Thy Son, and all that He claims to be, give me 
the light I need; show me where I may find books or 
commentaries which will explain this book.” He said he 
was called away soon afterward to a new place, and on 
entering the room found an old box containing five 
books, which proved to be a history of Israel and com- 
mentaries on the New Testament. Here, apparently, was 
his first prayer answered. He prayed again. Again his 
prayer was answered. Was it a mere coincidence? 
“There was someone at the other end.” Step by step 
he put God’s word to the test, until he came by personal 
experience into a vital relationship with God through the 
revelation of Christ. True to his convictions, he was 
baptized, stood the test of bitter persecution, and is today 
a living witness to the truth of God’s word and the saving 
power of Christ. 


20 


Are you willing to put Christ’s principle and the truth 
of the Gospels to the test as he did? If so, you will end 
by proving them experimentally to be a true record of a 
Person who is Himself the Truth and the Life. Faith is 
an honest assent to what we believe on evidence to be 
true. It is a natural growth, as truth is transformed into 
life, and the will yields to what the mind believes and the 
conscience approves. The Bible claims to be the Word 
of God. Its claims may be tested by experiment; they 
may be proved by experience. “If any man willeth to do, 
he shall know.” 


II. Dousts CoNcERNING JESUS CHRIST 


Again, let us follow the inductive method. Let us 
make sure of facts first. If we would deal more with 
these, we would have less doubt. It was the method of 
Jesus. He asked men to come and get acquainted with 
Him. He began at the base of the pyramid with His 
humanity, not at the apex of His divinity. Begin by 
reading through one Gospel with open mind. Do not iry 
to believe anything. Facts ask no favors: moral truth 
has a self-evidencing power. Be honest, follow what you 
admit to be truth; and you will believe when you come to 
know the facts. If yours is merely an intellectual diffi- 
culty, daily intimacy with Christ and the honest effort 
to follow His teaching will dispel doubt as light dispels 
the dark. 

But the cause of persistent unbelief usually lies deeper. 
The root of the trouble is often not in the intellect. It is 
not that men do not know enough, for, “knowing God, 
they glorified Him not as God, but became vain in their 
reasonings.” It is the heart that is wrong, for, as Jesus 

21 


said, “Men loved the darkness rather than the light, 
because their deeds were evil.’ But the final cause of 
persistent unbelief in spite of all evidence, even of the 
visible presence of Jesus Himself, is just this: “Ye will 
not come unto Me that ye may have life.”’ No amount of 
evidence will convince a man whose will is set against 
God, or against light. If a man will not do, he shall 
not know. 

A guileless Nathanael instantly recognized Christ. 
Faith for him was but the look of a pure heart into the 
face of his Master. A doubting Peter needed more 
evidence. But Christ gladly gave it. He walked and 
talked with him for two years, and then asked Peter, 
“Whom say ye that I am?” And with a faith founded 
on the rock of experience Peter answered, “Thou art 
the Christ.” The Jews still asked for signs. After three 
years of life and teaching they would not be convinced. 
Jesus took them on their own ground, and showed them 
the cause of their stubborn doubt. ‘How can ye believe” 
when your life is set against God? “Ye will not come.” 
And here in the field of the will He gave them this final 
challenge: “If any man willeth to do God’s will, he shall 
know” whether or not My teachings and claims are true. 

Set your will on God’s side. Try to do what you believe 
to be His will, and God will give you light as fast as you 
are willing to walk in it. Two instances of men at Yale 
University who tested this principle will illustrate the 
two alternatives. 

The first was Horace Bushnell, one of the strongest 
minds of the last generation. He honestly faced his 
doubts one day in this manner: “Js there no truth that 
I do believe? Yes, there is one, there is a distinction 

22 


between right and wrong. Have I ever taken the prin- 
ciple of right for my law? Have I ever thrown myself 
out on the principle? No, I have not. Then, here is 
something for me to do. Here then I will begin. If 
there is a God, he is a right God. If I have lost him in 
wrong, perhaps I shall find him in right. Will he not 
help me, or perchance, even be discovered to me?” Speak- 
ing of his own experience in later years, he describes 
it as follows: “Now the decisive moment had come. 
I dropped on my knees and there I prayed to the dim God, 
asking for help that I might begin a right life. My soul 
was borne up into God’s help. I rose. The whole sky 
was luminous about me. It was the morning, as it were, 
of a new eternity.” As he took one step in the light, he 
saw from that advanced position far enough to take 
another step. As he obeyed the truth, and took the next 
step, God gave him light enough for yet another. Un- 
consciously he was willing to do God’s will, though he did 
not at first know it as such. Step by step in personal 
experience he followed the light of truth, until he came 
to know a living God who answered prayer, a life-giving 
Saviour who saves from sin. And it was Bushnell who 
wrote “The Character of Jesus,’ one of the best short 
treatises on the divinity of Christ for men who are in 
doubt. 


“Perplexed in faith, but pure in deeds, 


At last he beat his music out. 
we > * * 


He fought his doubts and gathered strength; 
He would not make his judgment blind; 
He faced the spectres of the mind 

And laid them; thus he came at length 

To find a stronger faith his own.” 


23 


The other man came from the same college. He stood 
with a friend one night when his life hung in the balance. 
“T do not believe in Christ. This faith is all subjective 
with you men,” he said. His fellow-student made him 
the challenge: “Are you willing to give up the sin in 
which you admit you are living? If you are convinced 
that Christ is divine, that He is your Saviour, will you 
yield Him your life?’ He hung his head and counted 
the cost. At last he said: “No; J will not. I will not 
give it up for Him, nor for anyone.” With a will set 
against God, his heart became hardened and his mind 
darkened. Doubt deepened into set unbelief. Within a 
few years he had run the downward course of lust and sin 
and death—a wrecked and wasted life. If a man will 
not do, he shall not know. 

Whatever your past life or your present doubts, Christ’s 
principle still holds. Will you honestly put it to the 
test in experience? You have at least enough light to 
take the first step. You admit that there is a difference 
between right and wrong. You will admit that there are 
imperative reasons for doing the right. An honest effort 
to do the right will soon show you the need of some 
standard of right, some example or pattern or goal 
toward which to strive, and the need of a power greater 
than your own to enable you to follow that example. 
What is the highest truth, the most perfect moral stand- 
ard, the most winsome personality, the most perfect 
example you know? I think you will admit it is Jesus 
Christ. If you do admit this, are you willing, just so 
far as you see it to be the truth, to follow His teaching 
and example? If you are to follow Him, you will need 
to know Him; and if you are to get acquainted with 


24 


Him, you will need to go to the record of His life. If 
you are honest, you will be in earnest about this. Will 
you read through a single Gospel with open mind and 
apply the principle of Christ? Will you day by day read 
slowly through the Gospel of St. Luke or St. John in 
this way? Before you have finished, if you will obey 
what you admit to be truth, you may believe! Will you 
accept the challenge? 

Read the three chapters of the Sermon on the Mount, 
and recall the teaching of Christ. Read the three chap- 
ters of the last discourse of Christ (St. John xiv, xv, xvi) 
to recall the character of Christ, and then with these in 
mind review the claims of Christ as illustrated and 
evidenced by His teaching and life. He claims at once 
to be the “Son of God,” and the “Saviour of the world.” 
He claims to be “the Water of Life,” to satisfy the thirst 
of the human heart; “the Bread of Life,” to satisfy its 
hunger; “the Light of the World,” as its source of truth. 
He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life for salvation in 
this world; the Resurrection and the Life for the world 
to come. He claims to have come from the Father to 
reveal the Father, and to have returned to the Father, 
where He lives and reigns, the Risen Christ, with all 
power given unto Him in heaven and on earth! Who, 
then, is this? ‘What, then, shall J do with Jesus that is 
called Christ?” Like Pilate, you must decide that 
question. 

Many men in every age and in every land with just 
your doubts and difficulties, or yet greater ones, have 
found their way into a satisfying and rational faith, in 
the glad certainty of a personal, vital experience. Are 
you willing to make the same experiment they did? Just 


25 


as you are, with all your doubt or difficulty, will you 
read through one Gospel, a little portion each day, with 
open mind and honest heart, and try to live by what your 
own reason and conscience find as truth? Will you try 
to follow the life and teaching of Jesus, step by step, as 
it appeals to you? 

“Tf any man will do His will, he shall know.” 


26 





wf 





— == _ 





ae Cae 
nes “ 
Me oe (7 , 
aS , 
~~ 
“ey 





